- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15994 CRL.P No. 3334 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3334 OF 2026 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: KIRAN B M S/O MADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, HANGALLU VILLAGE, SOMAWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT 3 571 236 &PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASANNA D.P., ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SOMAWARPET POLICE STATION REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALURU 3 560 001 &RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R., HCGP) Digitally signed by PAVITHRA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15994 CRL.P No. 3334 of 2026 THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON REGULAR BAIL IN S.C.NO.89/2025 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.80/2025 OF SOMEARPET P.S., KODAGU DISTRICT, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 238(A), 61(2)(a), 103(1), 249(a) R/W 3(5) OF BNS, 2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF 1st ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KODAGU, AT MADIKERI. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER 1. This petition is filed by the petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.80/2025 filed by the respondent 3 Police for the offences punishable under Section 61(2)(a), 103(1), 238, 309(4), 249(a) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short BNS) seeking regular bail. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15994 CRL.P No. 3334 of 2026 Factual matrix of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that Sri. N.D. Vinod, S/o Damodara, had lodged a complaint stating that on 09.05.2025, around about 06.30 p.m., his brother Sri. N.D. Sampath went from Kushalangara in a car bearing the registration number KA-51-ME-1366. However, he was found missing. The respondent - Police after registering the missing complaint, started the investigation. During the investigation, the respondent 3 Police found the dead body of the brother of the complainant in Mageri Forest, Sakaleshpura. During the investigation, the facts of the case have been unfolded in such a way that on 17.06.2020, the brother of the complainant, namely N.D.Sampath @ Shambhu, had entered into an agreement of sale of the property bearing Survey No.105/19P1, of Hanagallu Village, measuring 0.95 acres. On the same day, an amount of Rs.4,50,000/- had been paid. On 01.07.2019, a Memorandum of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15994 CRL.P No. 3334 of 2026 Understanding was executed between Sangeeta and his brother. The agreement holder insisted that the brother of the complainant has to refund the amount, as the said agreement was not executed and as the said agreement has not been concluded in the case of the sale deed. Suspecting the involvement of the petitioner and others, a complaint came to be registered by the complainant. The respondent 3 Police, after registering a case, conducted an investigation and submitted the charge-sheet. 3. Heard Sri. Prasanna D.P., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Rangaswamy R., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent. 4. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences. The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. There is no clinching evidence to show that the petitioner was involved in the commission of said murder. In fact, the motive is attributed to accused No.3. However, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15994 CRL.P No. 3334 of 2026 the same accused has been enlarged on bail by the Co- Ordinate Bench of this Court. 5. It is further submitted that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence, and other accused persons have been enlarged on bail; hence, the petitioner may also be released on bail by imposing suitable conditions. He would abide by the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 6. Per Contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State of Karnataka vehemently submitted that it is an admitted fact that the deceased and the petitioner herein had entered into an agreement of sale in respect of immovable property. It is also an admitted fact that all the accused persons conspired together and committed the murder of the deceased, relating to the issue of immovable property. The - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15994 CRL.P No. 3334 of 2026 overt act of the present petitioner is very clear that the petitioner has deliberately committed murder of the deceased. Hence, it is not appropriate to grant bail. Making such submissions, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent State prays to reject the petition. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments of the charge-sheet, it appears from the record that the petitioner and the accused No.3 were having an extramarital affair. Both were running a cement brick factory at Hanagallu Village on receiving the hand loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- from the deceased N.D.Sampath. Similarly, the deceased N.D.Sampath had also lent an amount to Smt.Geeta and Smt.Lata to purchase a coffee plantation in Hanagallu Village. It is further stated that the deceased N.D.Sampath was living along with accused No.3 in the same house. It is also stated in the complaint that accused No.3 had lodged a complaint against deceased N.D.Sampath before - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15994 CRL.P No. 3334 of 2026 Kushalnagara Police Station for having committed an offence under the POCSO Act. The police have registered a case in Crime No.23/2023 under the POCSO Act. Similarly, the deceased N.D.Sampath had also filed a complaint against the petitioner herein and accused No.3. The said case has been registered by the Kushalnagara police in Crime No.24/2023. It is further stated that he entered into a compromise with N.D.Sampath and withdrew the complaint filed against him under the POCSO Act. However, N.D.Sampath did not withdraw the complaint which he had filed against accused No.3 and another. 8. Though it is alleged in the charge-sheet that the petitioner and others have committed murder of the deceased by using deadly weapons like a machete and a chopper. The fact remains that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. 9. Having considered the said aspect, it is appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner by imposing - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15994 CRL.P No. 3334 of 2026 suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution. 10. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. This Criminal Petition is allowed. ii. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.80/2025 filed by the respondent 3 Police for the offences punishable under Section 61(2)(a), 103(1), 238(a), 249(a), 309(4) read with 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one (01) surety to the like sum of the satisfaction of the Trial Court. iii. The petitioner shall neither threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15994 CRL.P No. 3334 of 2026 nor hamper the proceedings of the Court. iv. The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates, without fail. v. The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal cases till disposal of the case. In case the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions mentioned above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file a necessary application for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE NM